|
Post by dalekbuster523finish on Sept 18, 2016 21:38:07 GMT
That would totally have spoilt the reveal though. If it's just some new character, then who cares about who she is? I thought that she might be The Master but really didn't want it to be. Personally I was hoping for The Back Guardian. I was completely disappointed when I found out that she was The Master. I was the opposite. I was so glad that she was the Master.
|
|
|
Post by jasonward on Sept 18, 2016 21:53:41 GMT
Well just to upset the apple cart even more, I have to say, I always found Delgado's Master, whilst evil, somewhat daft, evil but ineffectual. Gomez's Master is brilliant, appearing to me as if she always about to turn out good, but actually always evil. Delgado's master holds little appeal for me, Gomez's Master I find spell binding.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 18, 2016 22:02:10 GMT
Well I loved Delgado's Master, as it's what I grew up with. So Roger Delgado is The Master for me. Ainley was a poor substitute and was only semi-evil by comparison!
However, Michelle Gomez really did justice to the part and was absolutely brilliant. Sure, it was an OTT performance, but she really was a 'Master' for the 21st Century Doctor Who audience... even though I was sure she'd turn out to be the Rani or something when all was said and done.
|
|
|
Post by mark687 on Sept 18, 2016 22:04:10 GMT
Well just to upset the apple cart even more, I have to say, I always found Delgado's Master, whilst evil, somewhat daft, evil but ineffectual. Gomez's Master is brilliant, appearing to me as if she always about to turn out good, but actually always evil. Delgado's master holds little appeal for me, Gomez's Master I find spell binding. Run Jason Save yourself
Regards
mark687
|
|
|
Post by barnabaslives on Sept 19, 2016 3:03:23 GMT
Well I loved Delgado's Master, as it's what I grew up with. So Roger Delgado is The Master for me. Ainley was a poor substitute and was only semi-evil by comparison! I'm still pretty equally divided on these two. Very fond of Delgado but I thought Ainley was pretty darned rotten considering that between Keeper of Traken and Logopolis, Nyssa is an orphan and The Mighty Tom Doctor has fallen. Amazing to think it now but at the time I don't think I even noticed the Beevers Master.
|
|
|
Post by acousticwolf on Sept 19, 2016 8:31:28 GMT
Well I loved Delgado's Master, as it's what I grew up with. So Roger Delgado is The Master for me. Ainley was a poor substitute and was only semi-evil by comparison! I'm still pretty equally divided on these two. Very fond of Delgado but I thought Ainley was pretty darned rotten considering that between Keeper of Traken and Logopolis, Nyssa is an orphan and The Mighty Tom Doctor has fallen. Amazing to think it now but at the time I don't think I even noticed the Beevers Master. Ditto. I think Delgado edges it for me over Ainley, but I really don't like the over-the-top insanity of Simms or Gomez. Anyway back on topic, I think Arcs work well when they are subtle - Bad Wolf worked as did Saxon because they weren't in-your-face. By the time we get to the Cracks and the Impossible Girl the arc seems to be main story, rather than the other way around. Cheers Tony
|
|
shutupbanks
Castellan
There’s a horror movie called Alien? That’s really offensive. No wonder everyone keeps invading you.
Likes: 5,677
|
Post by shutupbanks on Sept 19, 2016 9:14:40 GMT
Well I loved Delgado's Master, as it's what I grew up with. So Roger Delgado is The Master for me. Ainley was a poor substitute and was only semi-evil by comparison! However, Michelle Gomez really did justice to the part and was absolutely brilliant. Sure, it was an OTT performance, but she really was a 'Master' for the 21st Century Doctor Who audience... even though I was sure she'd turn out to be the Rani or something when all was said and done. Totally agree: hard to have a favourite Master - like the Doctor, each of them brought something unique to the role. And even when the scripts weren't up to snuff they gave it their all. Even... (takes a deep breath)... Eric Roberts, who was fantastic with the material he was given.
|
|
|
Post by omega on Sept 19, 2016 9:25:45 GMT
Well I loved Delgado's Master, as it's what I grew up with. So Roger Delgado is The Master for me. Ainley was a poor substitute and was only semi-evil by comparison! However, Michelle Gomez really did justice to the part and was absolutely brilliant. Sure, it was an OTT performance, but she really was a 'Master' for the 21st Century Doctor Who audience... even though I was sure she'd turn out to be the Rani or something when all was said and done. Totally agree: hard to have a favourite Master - like the Doctor, each of them brought something unique to the role. And even when the scripts weren't up to snuff they gave it their all. Even... (takes a deep breath)... Eric Roberts, who was fantastic with the material he was given. Can I supply the obligatory drezz for the occasion comment?
|
|
shutupbanks
Castellan
There’s a horror movie called Alien? That’s really offensive. No wonder everyone keeps invading you.
Likes: 5,677
|
Post by shutupbanks on Sept 19, 2016 9:36:10 GMT
Totally agree: hard to have a favourite Master - like the Doctor, each of them brought something unique to the role. And even when the scripts weren't up to snuff they gave it their all. Even... (takes a deep breath)... Eric Roberts, who was fantastic with the material he was given. Can I supply the obligatory drezz for the occasion comment? Please do!
|
|
|
Post by omega on Sept 19, 2016 9:42:15 GMT
Can I supply the obligatory drezz for the occasion comment? Please do! I always drezz for the occasion!
|
|
|
Post by dalekbuster523finish on Sept 19, 2016 10:10:25 GMT
I'm still pretty equally divided on these two. Very fond of Delgado but I thought Ainley was pretty darned rotten considering that between Keeper of Traken and Logopolis, Nyssa is an orphan and The Mighty Tom Doctor has fallen. Amazing to think it now but at the time I don't think I even noticed the Beevers Master. Ditto. I think Delgado edges it for me over Ainley, but I really don't like the over-the-top insanity of Simms or Gomez. Anyway back on topic, I think Arcs work well when they are subtle - Bad Wolf worked as did Saxon because they weren't in-your-face. By the time we get to the Cracks and the Impossible Girl the arc seems to be main story, rather than the other way around. Cheers Tony I disagree in regards the crack. I thought the crack in time was pretty subtle.
|
|
|
Post by omega on Sept 19, 2016 10:17:31 GMT
Ditto. I think Delgado edges it for me over Ainley, but I really don't like the over-the-top insanity of Simms or Gomez. Anyway back on topic, I think Arcs work well when they are subtle - Bad Wolf worked as did Saxon because they weren't in-your-face. By the time we get to the Cracks and the Impossible Girl the arc seems to be main story, rather than the other way around. Cheers Tony I disagree in regards the crack. I thought the crack in time was pretty subtle. It was the best of the Moffat arcs, actually developing as the season went on. River hadn't yet outstayed her welcome and wasn't central to the storyline like with series 6. It wasn't too confusing like series 6 could sometimes be or as hollow as 7B's Mysterious Girl arc, where the Doctor pretty much stated every other episode that Clara was a mystery, until Name of the Doctor where the reveals came with no foreshadowing whatsoever. The only fault with the Crack in Time was the follow through, who blew up the TARDIS and why.
|
|
|
Post by dalekbuster523finish on Sept 19, 2016 10:31:34 GMT
I disagree in regards the crack. I thought the crack in time was pretty subtle. It was the best of the Moffat arcs, actually developing as the season went on. River hadn't yet outstayed her welcome and wasn't central to the storyline like with series 6. It wasn't too confusing like series 6 could sometimes be or as hollow as 7B's Mysterious Girl arc, where the Doctor pretty much stated every other episode that Clara was a mystery, until Name of the Doctor where the reveals came with no foreshadowing whatsoever. The only fault with the Crack in Time was the follow through, who blew up the TARDIS and why. I watched a special feature on the Series 9 steelbook where Moffat says the point of the Impossible Girl arc was that the Doctor is determined there's a mystery around Clara but really she's just a normal girl. I love the Moffat era but if that was his intentions then I don't think it was executed very well. To me Clara seemed far from a 'normal girl' purely because of the fact she'd already appeared as a Victorian governess in the Snowmen and a Dalek in Asylum of the Daleks.
|
|
|
Post by omega on Sept 19, 2016 10:35:28 GMT
It was the best of the Moffat arcs, actually developing as the season went on. River hadn't yet outstayed her welcome and wasn't central to the storyline like with series 6. It wasn't too confusing like series 6 could sometimes be or as hollow as 7B's Mysterious Girl arc, where the Doctor pretty much stated every other episode that Clara was a mystery, until Name of the Doctor where the reveals came with no foreshadowing whatsoever. The only fault with the Crack in Time was the follow through, who blew up the TARDIS and why. I watched a special feature on the Series 9 steelbook where Moffat says the point of the Impossible Girl arc was that the Doctor is determined there's a mystery around Clara but really she's just a normal girl. I love the Moffat era but if that was his intentions then I don't think it was executed very well. To me Clara seemed far from a 'normal girl' purely because of the fact she'd already appeared as a Victorian governess in the Snowmen and a Dalek in Asylum of the Daleks. So why not show the Doctor running tests on Clara like he did with Amy in 6A? Put her in situations to get answers in some form or another (facing the Daleks for example)? It'd make him look a bit mean, but it's more than what he actually did.
|
|
|
Post by paulmorris7777 on Sept 19, 2016 10:35:36 GMT
I disagree in regards the crack. I thought the crack in time was pretty subtle. It was the best of the Moffat arcs, actually developing as the season went on. River hadn't yet outstayed her welcome and wasn't central to the storyline like with series 6. It wasn't too confusing like series 6 could sometimes be or as hollow as 7B's Mysterious Girl arc, where the Doctor pretty much stated every other episode that Clara was a mystery, until Name of the Doctor where the reveals came with no foreshadowing whatsoever. The only fault with the Crack in Time was the follow through, who blew up the TARDIS and why. Shame it took three years to explain!
|
|
|
Post by omega on Sept 19, 2016 10:38:04 GMT
It was the best of the Moffat arcs, actually developing as the season went on. River hadn't yet outstayed her welcome and wasn't central to the storyline like with series 6. It wasn't too confusing like series 6 could sometimes be or as hollow as 7B's Mysterious Girl arc, where the Doctor pretty much stated every other episode that Clara was a mystery, until Name of the Doctor where the reveals came with no foreshadowing whatsoever. The only fault with the Crack in Time was the follow through, who blew up the TARDIS and why. Shame it took three years to explain! I did say that follow through was the weak link. There's no need to say more on the subject unless it's constructive.
|
|
|
Post by dalekbuster523finish on Sept 19, 2016 10:39:08 GMT
I watched a special feature on the Series 9 steelbook where Moffat says the point of the Impossible Girl arc was that the Doctor is determined there's a mystery around Clara but really she's just a normal girl. I love the Moffat era but if that was his intentions then I don't think it was executed very well. To me Clara seemed far from a 'normal girl' purely because of the fact she'd already appeared as a Victorian governess in the Snowmen and a Dalek in Asylum of the Daleks. So why not show the Doctor running tests on Clara like he did with Amy in 6A? Put her in situations to get answers in some form or another (facing the Daleks for example)? It'd make him look a bit mean, but it's more than what he actually did. That could have helped but it would have all been outdone as soon as she jumped down the Doctor's time stream and shown she wasn't a normal girl.
|
|
|
Post by christmastrenzalore on Sept 19, 2016 11:18:40 GMT
I disagree in regards the crack. I thought the crack in time was pretty subtle. It was the best of the Moffat arcs, actually developing as the season went on. River hadn't yet outstayed her welcome and wasn't central to the storyline like with series 6. Plus, all the following arcs are based on a rug pull, where he'd create a problem, then have the resolution be that the problem was never real. The Doctor is going to die... surprise, no he isn't. You don't even know the Doctor's real name... because it isn't important really. Who the hell is Clara... she's a regular girl that jumped into a thing. This Incarnation was ruthless and unworthy of the title of Doctor... plot twist, he was cool really. Is the Doctor really a good man, or is he a bad guy... he's a good guy. What is the hybrid... well for starters, it might not even be a hybrid.
|
|
|
Post by acousticwolf on Sept 19, 2016 12:39:55 GMT
Ditto. I think Delgado edges it for me over Ainley, but I really don't like the over-the-top insanity of Simms or Gomez. Anyway back on topic, I think Arcs work well when they are subtle - Bad Wolf worked as did Saxon because they weren't in-your-face. By the time we get to the Cracks and the Impossible Girl the arc seems to be main story, rather than the other way around. Cheers Tony I disagree in regards the crack. I thought the crack in time was pretty subtle. Up until the point he {Spoiler}put his hand through the crack and came back with a piece of the Tardis Cheers Tony
|
|
|
Post by paulmorris7777 on Sept 19, 2016 12:47:29 GMT
I disagree in regards the crack. I thought the crack in time was pretty subtle. Up until the point he {Spoiler}put his hand through the crack and came back with a piece of the Tardis Cheers Tony What was that about?
|
|